Blzzards & Fog of War

[coarse bear]

So we have to pay to have blizzards and fog of war now? They were free on all previous versions of the game. #risk #options #modifiers #news_community_bulletin

[cunning surge]

They did announce that change a while ago.
#news_announcements message
And does it only apply to hosting games or can't you join them without premium?

[shrewd cape]

It's only hosting that is impacted, so it's similar to not owning a map

[buoyant moat]

I can't find games when I use simply filter (w blizzard on) so it certainly has an impact
I like blizzards quite a bit for excitingness but looks like they won't be common

[tardy jacinth]

i can understand making these premium only for player games, but imo they shouldnt be paywalled for solo games against bots

[peak grove]

This is genuinely disappointing. How hard are the devs hurting for money that they have to now charge to have blizzards and FOW? What’s next, requiring to watch adds before your roll?

[buoyant moat]

they make you watch ads to play on mobile lmao

[shrewd cape]

We only have ads before & after a game, no ads throughout (which is much more prevalent, and would probably have been better overall for RISK, at the expense of F2P)

The community have expressed clearly that we are not meeting expectations regarding how frequent & how feature rich updates are, only way for that to increase is to increase conversion rates so we can have more developers on RISK

[cunning surge]

I tested this "problem" yesterday, because the post author did not explain what is going on. I can verify that you can join portal blizzard and fog games without premium. You just can't create them yourself.
To answer the question of this post no you don't have to pay to play those modes.

[lusty crest]

Would've been better solution if devs added that player without premium have to watch several ads (2-3) when hosting a match with blizzards/FOW than taking these important mechanics (that create huge(!) replayability to every single map in the game) behind a paywall

[rose sentinel]

Although this is a pretty controversial opinion, watching a 30 second ad to play a game that should last 30+ minutes isn’t that big of an issue.

If you want to play your settings with all the fun modifiers, while also getting new fun updates like portals, then the devs need a way to make money. Best way of doing so, is a one time purchase for infinite gameplay.

Although, from the perspective of someone that plays a LOT, it makes sense to support the game and allow myself to play as much as I want in the first place.

I believe that if you enjoy something enough and play enough, that a one time purchase of $10 isn’t that heart wrenching. If your circumstances don’t allow you to spend $10 on the game to play more, then don’t, but don’t complain either. Although the update has had a few bumpy rides, I think overall it is better than it was.

[tardy jacinth]

"only way for that to increase is to increase conversion rates"

couldn't you increase conversion rates by adding new features to premium, instead of taking them away from F2P? Portals couldve been made premium without dragging fog and blizzards with it

[peak grove]

This is great news!
One question though, is 45+ mins the average lobby time a player waits for a a premium member to appear with FOW initiated? Asking for a friend.

[peak grove]

Conversion rates as in ROI? Because I feel a lot more veteran players will now be converting to other games?

[lusty crest]

Agree on it. Noone would complain if any new features such as portals will be premium exclusive, but making you to pay for things that were f2p and so important in gameplay leaves you with a nasty feeling that you were robbed

[peak grove]

Nope not falling for that.
First it’s, $10 just to be able to use a previous F2P feature; FoW, next it’s $10 if you want to play with more than 2 people. After that it’ll be $10 if you want to play on a cellular network. I hope I didn’t pre announce the next two update. Hate to ruin the surprises.

[lusty crest]

I agree that devs need money and new content such as portals should be premium exclusive, noone complains about it. People complain about having to pay for features that were previously f2p.

Saying that one time 10$ purchase is devs best solution for making money is controversial. If player without a premium is playing the game then he'll watch several adds regardless of if he wants it or not + it's a constant income as long as player willing to play the game. Yeah, it's not 10$, 1$ or 0,1$ per add, but if player is fine with playing the game, then it's going to reach and surpass 10$ at some point. But when Blizzards and fog is taken away from him behind the statement "pay or don't complain", it's a good chance that he'll just quit playing and devs won't get nor 10$ for premium nor any money for ads watching

[rose sentinel]

Having had premium since 2016, have had no issues with anything taken away from what I previously had, which ironically, is the best investment in a game I have ever made. $10 for unlimited play and fun in a game I have played for over 6 years now? Anytime. Of course, if you aren’t planning on playing for that long, or just got into the mood for a little bit it’s understandable not to pay.

Keep in mind, the devs don’t owe anybody anything, and one of the best marketing strategies is to give someone a taste of something good and then in order to get more, they need to pay. It’s a simple marketing strategy that is very effective in the long term. I’m not arguing the right or wrong, I am looking at it from an objective positive/negative point-of-view rather than a “this is how I feel”. And don’t get me wrong, I don’t like HOW they did it, as it came as a surprise to many, but it was a statement that says, “If you want to play with mods, just spend a little.”

The ads to play time is about what Spotify is but a little bit better, 30 minutes of gameplay before the next ad isn’t too bad especially if you’re only going to play one or two games. Keep in mind though, the revenue they gain from ads is also only from non-premium players. Premium players don’t watch ads so the one time purchase is final, $10 and never have to spend again unless you want something else. Overall, I don’t see too many issues with it. But in the end it is just my opinion, and is open for discussion and disagreement.

[shrewd cape]

I'm not directly involved in the decision making / why it's done this way vs just new modes being premium.

That said, I'm more towards RISK being a paid app over free so have my own bias too 😄 I don't like ads / don't play games where it's forced, but if it's easy to remove I don't care - try and see how it is.

I guess you could argue how much is made on average per player from ads - but if I had to guess it'll average more to buy Premium.

For sure you'll get some players playing for free for 5+ years - and they may have watched enough ads to equate to Premium, but it'll be a minority - I don't think most players will watch enough ads to equate to Premium overall.

Not a massive fan of the changes to F2P but if it's between doing this so we can have more, faster, and higher quality updates, or continuing how it was but just receiving occasional map updates - going to vote for option 1 every time.

Also "$12 for Premium" is a bit of an overstatement as most players purchase either as a bundle or while it's on sale.

You can play for 1 year and pay for 50% off (a few times a year it pops up?) from free gems alone (another way we'd improved F2P experience, as you couldn't obtain maps or premium without purchasing them before)

The added benefit of gems route being an option is it's only available for players actively checking (and likely playing) RISK, so being a long time player, means being able to purchase Premium just for playing.

For bigger changes moving forwards, bigger changes now - just thinking of how many updates, access to new maps & modes there's been since I first played - access to all of these in F2P (even if it's not as host) is a ton of content - BP & Gems are also big examples.

[carmine granite]

Honestly, I cant believe how much people are complaining about this. One time purchase of $10 is such good value. The fact that you can join a game with any map and any settings whilst being f2p is amazing. Compared to just about every other game developer out there, SMG is being extremely minimal with their monetisation strategy and I really cannot understand how people can be so upset about this. They have to make money somehow, so instead of constantly complaining and making demands of them, ante up and buy premium to help developers continue to develop the game we love!!

[weak pecan]

Hey, I have an idea… how about some premium players host some games with blizzards on…
I’ve never really played blizzards too much but I’ll host games with blizzards or portals (maybe both) for the next ten days or until the first overly obvious time I get targeted for being the game host… If a couple other premium players do the same you should see a nice increase in the games you’ve been looking for.

[tardy jacinth]

problem is i only play solo against bots, so now im just locked out of blizzards, fog of war, and zombies

[timid turret]

Wow you weirdos. If you're going to spend more than 10 hours on a game, pay the $10. How many hours have you put in so far? This is frankly embarrassing.

[weak pecan]

Wow… you’re on a discord for an online version of a board game that more than fifty years old… maybe you’re one of the weirdos.

[shrewd cape]

Aren't we all? 😄

[peak grove]

You are correct: “how much people are complaining”, “can’t understand how people can be so upset about this”.
You see the dilemma, acknowledge it, but still can’t understand? Take into account, these people that are complaining are only the ones that you are aware of.
One incremental decision, and enough people are complaining to bring notice. The devs want a means of generating more revenue, so as, to produce more content for players? Something is not adding up.
Economically, it makes sense, logically, quite the opposite. Revenue will increase, based off those that decide to agree that this has become a P2P game. All at the expense of a diminishing fan base.
If SMG is willing to pull previous F2P game options, who’s to say they don’t make certain time slots premium only?

[carmine granite]

Seems like a major reach. Still a great deal on offer for free and $10 is a very reasonable and small price to pay for a game. I acknowledge the ‘dilemma’ as being pretty unrealistic and naive on the part of the players complaining, thats all. Your argument that it is economically feasible but illogical makes no sense. If its going to cause a major loss in player base (which i dont believe it will) then it is not economically feasible either. I believe it is both a good economic decision and a natural, logical progression for the game to move forward

[peak grove]

Correct.
Generate more revenue by either increasing costs or increasing sales.

I guess we will have to wait and see how this affects fan base. I have it on good authority, that as of yesterday, fan base has decreased by one.

[buoyant moat]

This game should have just been $10 to play in the first place, but I suspect they make a lot more money selling cosmetics and maps to a handful of whales that buy everything and would be losing money if the only monetisation is buying the game. The real underlying complaint (from me at least) is that if this game was not protected by law (copyright/trademark/whatever) someone would have made a version that's both better and doesn't charge you for literally everything - SMG is literally just milking the "Risk" name as hard as they can

[rose sentinel]

What a shame.

[keen crest]

fal#9450 has been warned

Reason: Posted a link

[peak grove]

Correct:
Thatplaceimgur.com/a/HhfHgwc

[buoyant moat]

ah i forgot about reviews, Ill make sure to go drop one on the app store and steam

[lusty crest]

What a shame that 1 devs decision is going to backfire at them

[rose sentinel]

The only negative change is a few bugs, and removing fogs/blizzards for FTP. If you really don't want to spend $10 to support a game that you would put a lot of time into, not to be too harsh, you will end up having less of an impact on the devs thought process.

[peak grove]

Ya may want to check out the reviews on the App Store and Steam, just saying 😐

[rose sentinel]

Haven't seen app store, but if anything makes the game kick the bucket, it's not gonna be a few reviews on the internet. People play the game because they enjoy it, and if losing these two modifications on the game makes you delete the game, then you truly didn't enjoy the game

[lusty crest]

You know, these people were potential of spreading the game among their friends and potential of devs collecting money for them. So much about financial side of situation.

People did enjoy the game, and even myself that really cautios about spending money for in game content thought about buying something once I'll have an opportunity, but now me and authors of "few reviews on the internet" won't spend on this game a single penny.

This game became popular because enough people loved it. And it can completely be forgotten if enough people start to hate it. "Not to be too harsh" let's see where it's going to end up later

[weak pecan]

So If SMG doesn’t immediately provide you with free entertainment then you will spam them with negative reviews and you won’t bring your large following of I assume free loader friends to the game. This is called extortion. Very Pirate of you! I approve, but you aren’t asking for enough. Dream Bigger! Why can’t SMG provide free snacks and complimentary high speed internet access, and a liquid cooled gaming rig otherwise how could you possibly enjoy yourself.
Here let me write a review for you: “This game is not free. It has a mildly intrusive in game purchase system and occasional ads, when you can’t stand the ads anymore you can for the outrageous price of approximately ten dollars use the game for the rest of natural time or until they take the servers down without ads. The game play itself is a reasonable online approximation of a strategy board game which seems to provide an even platform for paying and non paying players alike to meet up and have a game of Risk. I like my games unbalanced and free, I like my gaming companies cowering in fear and going bankrupt therefore I give it Zero Stars!” Does that sound good to you? Maybe you didn’t actually want to play Risk in the first place. If I have that wrong then please let me know when you have your own “territory conquering free for all” online game up and running. I’m sure we’ll all come and play.

[rose sentinel]

If you enjoyed the game. Then there is no reason to stop playing. If you want to buy a game that just released for $60 go for it, but you don’t even have to do that in this game. You either pay $10 for unlimited play and all modifications, or you don’t.

[lusty crest]

I never said that SMG has to provide every bit of content for free, cowering in fear for negative reviews and that their game is broken. You can view me as free loader if you wish, it's your business.
Just to clarify, I think the game has great balance, works great, having customisations and maps that you have to pay to use is a great way of supporting the game, and thankfull for all the free content it has and the ability to gain h2p content for free (2 gems per day).
I just telling my point that moving behind the paywall the previous f2p features that were free and had a positive impact on players and making them want to play the game and even pay for extra content is a really controversial move and has it's consequences.
If you love to exaggerate things heres what it looks like.
You were loner, but eventually met friends that were there for you, helped you to make even more friends. And at some point you became really popular. And at some point you had a choice between dumping your new friends or dumping your old friends that bring you here in the first place. And you choose the second option.
"Does that sound good to you?"

[lusty crest]

Yeah, I agree with you. But it does make sense to stop playing if you have a problem with some changes. People don't complain about having to pay for something good. People complain that they have to pay for something that was free for years and worked it's part in attaching people to the game (it's not a full price game after a free beta test to sound fair, you know). And it's not some minor features. It's core features that made a ton of different ways to play around situation in a match.
At least thanks for leaving some way to enjoy these features in premium players lobby.
Thanks I guess

[weak pecan]

…okay so you like the game. You are offering constructive criticism and when you say you won’t pay one penny for the game ever you were being hyperbolic… Have fun

[lusty crest]

Have fun too. Thanks for the conversation.
About my hyperbolic words. I apologize for that, but when @rose sentinel talking about other players that are upset about some changes as about some worthless trash (quote "What a shame" about a guy that got really upset and quit playing risk because of these changes, and quote "few reviews on the internet" and his whole attitude "pay or don't complain") triggered me. Just hate when people put someone socially below themselves for different opinions. Might of overreacted, but heres the reason

[weak pecan]

Thank you too. But don’t apologize for hyperbole… I think nearly my entire previous post was hyperbolic… exaggerating your position to show you how it might sound. Glad you think the game is balanced. I agree. I hate the in-app purchase business model because of the way it unbalances game play and tries to maximize addictive behavior in players in OTHER games. My point perhaps too hidden in exaggerated humor was that through accident or intent SMG has a rather inoffensive in app purchase and pay for premium system that while not ideal is still providing a large online platform for us all to play on. Ultimately we are here for the game that other players can give us, SMG is just providing the road for us to drive on. I hope you’re wrong about players leaving because they can’t host with features that they can still join games with.

Hope my “Have Fun” didn’t come off as dismissive… I really mean have fun here on discord in the game, in your life.

[buoyant moat]

I think the most here would say their in-app purchases are a few steps past "mildly intrusive".

There are (at least):

1. ads
2. tokens (of which they have lowered the token cap at least one time)
3. blizzards and fog of war (which used to be free)
4. maps, cosmetics, emotes

On the bright side at least they haven't sunk low enough to add loot boxes.

[lusty crest]

Don't worry i got your point and glad that we cooled things down. I apologized because you cooled down so I cooled down as well. And don't apologize for your words. We all have a right to express or thoughts, reactions and frustration. So don't worry about that.

Well it's pretty fine in-app purchase buisness model. I mean, there's a plenty of free content, you can save 2 gems per day for buying some extra content (which is about 1 year of playing for buying premium with 50% discount), you have 2 purchasable maps free to host every week, ads not on your every step and token system isn't too strict and if 60 tokens isn't enough for you, then you can watch 1 ad for 5 tokens. And the platform overall working very good (the only app related issue is that I couldn't reconnect to match if I close app for 1 blink of an eye). But taking such important part of gameplay that was free as long as the videogame exist behind a paywall is some betrayal bs move. If they need more money they could've done something like the event with amazon prime but without third side. For example, "buy N amount of gems and get exclusive customize stuff" for a limited amount of time. And bring it up every half a year so people would've waited for this opportunity as for a discount (human psychology factor).

No, don't worry, I got that you just wished me to have fun literally.
Thank you very much. Wish you the best on discord, in game and in your life.
Glad that you're a nice guy.

[weak pecan]

I totally forgot about tokens… truth be told I dislike ads but hate hate hate the lag and crashes that seem to come from ad players so I probably went premium within days of using the app… so I guess maybe I’m out of touch. I hope you don’t have ads popping up mid game.

[buoyant moat]

Oh also to be clear on my view - I have nothing against premium players or paying $10 for this game, I'm against charging for features that used to be free, and re: ads. I believe there are only ads when you try to join a lobby and not midgame, but I certainly am not going to use mobile to find out

[lusty crest]

To be fair 1 and 2 are pretty fair as it doesn't really take that much from you. If you would get 1 token per ad that would be much worse, don't you agree? :D

About 4.. well, at least they added some cosmetics through leveling up and you have 2 purchasable maps free to host that shuffles every week, and you not forbidden to join other lobbies with purchasable maps, so it's not too bad, but it I agree, a big chunk of content is behind a paywall (mostly about maps and maybe emotes as they help you to comunicate with other players even without alliances turned on)

But I 100% agree with you on the 3rd one. That's some nasty stuff that they moved it behind a paywall and really upset about it too.

[weak pecan]

Calling a pirate a nice guy… them’s fighting words.

Maybe they can go to a subscription premium that allows for unlimited play, but otherwise allows access to all the features for a limited number of games per month. That would still allow for a motivated revenue stream while allowing the casual player or players without disposable income that they can throw down for a game to try out all the features. If there was enough income coming in that way that they could do away with ads and cosmetics all together that would be great. That said… let’s play Risk

[lusty crest]

I'm not sarcastic on your nickname or anything. Just appreciate that you're a nice guy :D

Actually, that's the best solution in this situation in my opinion. Nothing more, nothing less.

And about your previous question.
You only see ads when getting to lobby list from main menu, after the game (you can skip ads in these cases after few seconds) and when watching ad for 5 tokens or for 2 gems (have to watch full add and can only watch it for gems once per day)

See you in game :D

[peak grove]

Correct.
Potential cliéntal may be thwarted by the reviews, that’s if the 18min lobby wait times don’t scare them off. But hey, it’s just a few people. I mean, the devs made a decision to remove certain parameters of the game, only because, it would only affect… a few people.

[rose sentinel]

Bingo. If you want to play more often, you need to be able to spend 10$ if you don't want to then you don't have to

[peak grove]

Exactly. I don’t believe my $10 is going to entice more players to wait 15+ mins for other players to discover that there is a game with FOW being hosted. But hey, it’s only a 15+ min lobby wait time…for now.

[peak grove]

Correct.
Extortion (noun) - the act or practice of extorting especially money or other property.

I took the time and liberty to correct the misspellings and grammar in your review.

RISK is a game that will offer hours of timeless entertainment. Empty lobbies, never ending lobby queues, and a diminishing fan base.
That’s not all, a development department that will immerse players with content only available to participating monetary oriented players.
But wait there’s more, for the low low introductory price, RISK will allow you to play with more than 2 players*. Do you like maps, well RISK has got all the maps*. RISK is even available to play on cellular networks*.
*RISK will only allow these features for a limited time. Prices subject to change. National and data rate may apply so long as SMG profits from it and it only affects a small number of players.

[rose sentinel]

They aren't extorting money. They are just providing more incentives before and limiting what you can do without. Extorting is if they stopped you from playing all together and asked money to continue playing. now if you want certain settings then you need to find a game to play with those settings. Overall, the end of the argument lies in if you are willing to spend $10 on a game you enjoy or not.

[carmine granite]

very much agree and I appreciate you taking the time to articulate responses in this forum because I got to the point where I couldn’t be bothered

[keen crest]

fal#9450 has been warned

Reason: Posted a link

[tardy jacinth]

the "just pay $10" crowd isnt addressing the main problem people have, which is that the update hid core f2p features behind a paywall. Noone would be pissed if only portals were made premium, or if fog/blizzards/zombies were premium from the start. Then again, risk's playerbase would've been a lot smaller if they were all premium from the start

[weak pecan]

I’m sure SOMEONE would have been pissed if portals were premium. Zombies and Fog are “premium” in that they add something to the game that would be very difficult to simulate in over the board play. Blizzards seem like a basic feature. I’m not part of any “just pay $10” crowd. Pay the money or don’t pay, but don’t complain as a state of being… instead enjoy the features you can use. All these features you mention are still free to play after all . If a thing is free enjoy it while you can but don’t complain when it isn’t free anymore. But I assume that you and others are not actually complaining for yourselves but instead concerned that a paywall will discourage users, and cause a loss in the player base. That position is worth discussion… but the other… “it was free it’s not free now, I’m outraged!” sounds rather silly to me. There is so much to enjoy here … if you like to play Risk… then enjoy it while you can… SMG will probably do a reboot soon where you’ll have to pay for each attack or have an airplane flying over the map pulling a banner ad for adult diapers.

[buoyant moat]

the last one is too real, don't give them ideas

[peak grove]

Geeze, anyone else keeping track of the latest reviews of RISK in the App Store?
Hopefully those that paid $10 for a free game can get a refund before SMG becomes insolvent.

[peak grove]

How soon before RISK becomes a Discord only game? As in, come to Discord and see if anyone setup a time a date to join a game.
Never mind, seems to already be in effect. 45+ mins to fill up a 6 person game.
Can anyone tell me if spending $10 will resolve 1/2hr+ wait times? I mean, granted, I’ll have FoW available.

[shrewd cape]

The crashing issue on iOS 12.5.5 & 12.5.6 is likely the biggest factor on available game lobbies, hotfix should be on Monday though

And yeah reviews are a bit more hectic than usual - that was a fun day yesterday 🥲

[buoyant moat]

Is iOS actually a major platform for playing? I really would have expected the game to be dominated by steam/pc players

[shrewd cape]

I don't have stats to reference directly, but yeah it's also very popular there too.

Worth noting that it's across iphones & ipads & ipod touch (and whatever new ones came by)

Android I think is more popular overall, steam less so - it's worth noting that as RISK was initially mobile & tablet only for ~5 years, it's also a big "preference" thing for sticking to it on mobile.
Even on this Discord it's much more common to be Mobile only than PC only

[peak grove]

Q: Now that many veteran users have left RISK for other more promising venues. How much revenue has SMG lost with players not having to watch ads every time they start a game?

[rose sentinel]

“Other more promising venues.” Like what? There isn’t really anything that close to risk and the player base is fine, and they still make plenty of money. And most veteran players have premium.

[lusty crest]

"The player base is fine" m-kay
You can keep pretending that people didn't complain about finding people to play taking forever in other forum topic

And about "Other more promising venues". It:s not supposed to be game similar to risk. It can be anything that worth spending time and maybe money more than risk :)

[rose sentinel]

It’s not hard to find a game. I create a lobby, open for 5 slots and fill the lobby in under 3 minutes. I don’t know what weird settings you use to make people avoid the games you make, but that isn’t my fault. 😅

[peak grove]

While I do accept your option, the landslide of negative reviews on the App Store and Steam say otherwise.

[shrewd cape]

Quite difficult to gauge negative impact, we actually gained a massive amount of new players last month - uninstalls weren't much higher either - Worth noting that's for Android side, can't speak to Steam/Apple side personally as I don't have stats etc. for those.

Also can't speak to $ side, as also not my area 😄

You may notice that reviews are still quite mixed (yes there's a big spike of negative reviews, but we had quite a spike of positive reviews alongside that)

A fair chunk of the recent negative reviews were already negative reviews (regarding ads or tokens or dice or ai) - so they don't imapct overall rating - just impacts the publicly displayed (recent rating by device type)

Most of the positive reviews are all newer players trying out RISK, either coming from playing other strategy games or from the board version - the "no fog/blizzards/zombie mode" aren't really a big factor for them as can play these by joining them when hosted by other players already.

We're also aiming to add new modes & modifiers (not all) into Premium instead of as separate purchases, part of why Fog & Blizzards was added too.
It should mean that as the playerbase grows and the app evolves, Premium will have a much higher value to players - increasing our conversion rate - so you don't have to buy something new each update & spending more for these, instead we're aiming for more players to be Premium instead.

I found an old review reply from Ivan on the store referencing that in 2018 all of our purchases combined was less than the average weekly spend per player on big games - crazy to think about 😅

We're going instead for permanently owned / lifetime purchases while they become more valuable over time thanks to additions to the game.

[peak grove]

If they are making plenty of money, then why place FoW behind a paywall? 🧐

[rose sentinel]

Who doesn’t want more money? 😅

Although on another note, what Luci said above is a great explanation and hint into the direction of the game. As the game grows and develops more, more incentives will be added to premium.

Placing the items behind a pay wall in the first place was a way to make more money. Which is a good strategy in the long run, because all the newer players aren’t aware of that, and the ones that get premium are pleasant to find out they can modify their game with crazy settings now.

[peak grove]

So new players that come won’t buy premium because they aren’t aware of options that are only available to Premium players?
I foresee SMG opening up premium options to non-premium players, for a limited time, as an incentive…only to be foreshadowed by another v3.8 rebuttal by the public.

[rose sentinel]

Not what I said. There are options included when buying premium. The main incentive of premium from the get go, was to play unlimited games. It was never about the extra things with it. Now there are more mini incentives for players who want unlimited play to try.